search for: _ps3

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98398 --- Comment #11 from Peter Wu <peter at lekensteyn.nl> --- So 4.7 and before used the "DSM" method on runtime-suspend: - \_SB.PCI0.RP05.PEGP._DSM would be invoked to enable Optimus - \_SB.PCI0.RP05.PEGP._PS3 is then invoked which would enter D3cold (note, this method is still used in 4.8 on older laptops or with the pcie_pm_port=off kernel option) Since 4.8, _DSM is not called anymore by nouveau (when support from the PCI core is detected) and this sequence should instead happen: - \_SB.PCI0.RP05.PEGP...

...top.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98398 > > > > --- Comment #11 from Peter Wu <peter at lekensteyn.nl> --- > > So 4.7 and before used the "DSM" method on runtime-suspend: > > - \_SB.PCI0.RP05.PEGP._DSM would be invoked to enable Optimus > > - \_SB.PCI0.RP05.PEGP._PS3 is then invoked which would enter D3cold > > (note, this method is still used in 4.8 on older laptops or with the > > pcie_pm_port=off kernel option) > > > > Since 4.8, _DSM is not called anymore by nouveau (when support from the PCI > > core is detected) and this seq...

...gt; https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98398 > > --- Comment #11 from Peter Wu <peter at lekensteyn.nl> --- > So 4.7 and before used the "DSM" method on runtime-suspend: > - \_SB.PCI0.RP05.PEGP._DSM would be invoked to enable Optimus > - \_SB.PCI0.RP05.PEGP._PS3 is then invoked which would enter D3cold > (note, this method is still used in 4.8 on older laptops or with the > pcie_pm_port=off kernel option) > > Since 4.8, _DSM is not called anymore by nouveau (when support from the PCI > core is detected) and this sequence should instead happ...

...gt;> 3); - push_block("Method", "_PS0, 0"); - stmt("Store", "0x%02x, \\_GPE.DPT1", slot); - stmt("Store", "0x80, \\_GPE.DPT2"); - pop_block(); - push_block("Method", "_PS3, 0"); - stmt("Store", "0x%02x, \\_GPE.DPT1", slot); - stmt("Store", "0x83, \\_GPE.DPT2"); pop_block(); push_block("Method", "_EJ0, 1"); stmt("Store", "0x%02x,...

...8398 > > > > > > --- Comment #11 from Peter Wu <peter at lekensteyn.nl> --- > > > So 4.7 and before used the "DSM" method on runtime-suspend: > > > - \_SB.PCI0.RP05.PEGP._DSM would be invoked to enable Optimus > > > - \_SB.PCI0.RP05.PEGP._PS3 is then invoked which would enter D3cold > > > (note, this method is still used in 4.8 on older laptops or with the > > > pcie_pm_port=off kernel option) > > > > > > Since 4.8, _DSM is not called anymore by nouveau (when support from the PCI > > > core...

...t port be in D3hot at that point? Wouldn't that be > > > > > > a suspend ordering violation? > > > > > > > > > > No. We put the GPU into D3hot first, > > > > > > OK > > > > > > Does this involve any AML, like a _PS3 under the GPU object? > > > > I don't see _PS3 (nor _PS0) for that object. If I read it right the GPU > > itself is not described in ACPI tables at all. > > OK > > > > > > then the root port and then turn > > > > > off the power resourc...

...t should show if the ACPI core even tries to add those > power resources. So Rick has tested this patch now on top of 4.8.4 (mainline fails to boot due to a kbuild issue which I reported elsewhere), but the output is empty. That seems to indicate that flags.power_resources is unset. Given that _PS3 exists and is indeed a package with some elements, it seems that acpi_extract_power_resources is failing. Note that in the SSDT, the power resource NVP3 was referenced before it was defined, could that result in this enumeration failure? Relevant SSDT excerpt: Scope (\_SB.PCI0.RP05) {...

...essible. > > > > > > > > Why would the parent port be in D3hot at that point? Wouldn't that be > > > > a suspend ordering violation? > > > > > > No. We put the GPU into D3hot first, > > OK > > Does this involve any AML, like a _PS3 under the GPU object? I don't see _PS3 (nor _PS0) for that object. If I read it right the GPU itself is not described in ACPI tables at all. > > > then the root port and then turn > > > off the power resource (which is attached to the root port) resulting > > > the...

...Wouldn't that be > > > > > > > a suspend ordering violation? > > > > > > > > > > > > No. We put the GPU into D3hot first, > > > > > > > > OK > > > > > > > > Does this involve any AML, like a _PS3 under the GPU object? > > > > > > I don't see _PS3 (nor _PS0) for that object. If I read it right the GPU > > > itself is not described in ACPI tables at all. > > > > OK > > > > > > > > then the root port and then turn > > &gt...

...> > > > > a suspend ordering violation? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. We put the GPU into D3hot first, > > > > > > > > > > OK > > > > > > > > > > Does this involve any AML, like a _PS3 under the GPU object? > > > > > > > > I don't see _PS3 (nor _PS0) for that object. If I read it right the GPU > > > > itself is not described in ACPI tables at all. > > > > > > OK > > > > > > > > > > then the ro...

...> > > > > a suspend ordering violation? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. We put the GPU into D3hot first, > > > > > > > > > > OK > > > > > > > > > > Does this involve any AML, like a _PS3 under the GPU object? > > > > > > > > I don't see _PS3 (nor _PS0) for that object. If I read it right the GPU > > > > itself is not described in ACPI tables at all. > > > > > > OK > > > > > > > > > > then the ro...

...t port be in D3hot at that point? Wouldn't that be > > > > > > a suspend ordering violation? > > > > > > > > > > No. We put the GPU into D3hot first, > > > > > > OK > > > > > > Does this involve any AML, like a _PS3 under the GPU object? > > > > I don't see _PS3 (nor _PS0) for that object. If I read it right the GPU > > itself is not described in ACPI tables at all. > > OK > > > > > > then the root port and then turn > > > > > off the power resource...

...oot due to a kbuild issue which I reported elsewhere), but the output > > is empty. That seems to indicate that flags.power_resources is unset. > > Is it completely empty or is it empty just for RP05? It should print out > all devices with power resources. > > > Given that _PS3 exists and is indeed a package with some elements, it > > seems that acpi_extract_power_resources is failing. Note that in the > > SSDT, the power resource NVP3 was referenced before it was defined, > > could that result in this enumeration failure? Relevant SSDT excerpt: > &gt...

...> > > > --- Comment #11 from Peter Wu <peter at lekensteyn.nl> --- > > > > So 4.7 and before used the "DSM" method on runtime-suspend: > > > > - \_SB.PCI0.RP05.PEGP._DSM would be invoked to enable Optimus > > > > - \_SB.PCI0.RP05.PEGP._PS3 is then invoked which would enter D3cold > > > > (note, this method is still used in 4.8 on older laptops or with the > > > > pcie_pm_port=off kernel option) > > > > > > > > Since 4.8, _DSM is not called anymore by nouveau (when support from > the...

...> > > Why would the parent port be in D3hot at that point? Wouldn't that be > > > > > a suspend ordering violation? > > > > > > > > No. We put the GPU into D3hot first, > > > > OK > > > > Does this involve any AML, like a _PS3 under the GPU object? > > I don't see _PS3 (nor _PS0) for that object. If I read it right the GPU > itself is not described in ACPI tables at all. OK > > > > then the root port and then turn > > > > off the power resource (which is attached to the root port) r...

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 01:46:14PM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 12:34:22PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 12:28 PM Mika Westerberg > > <mika.westerberg at intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 11:29:33PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > last week or so I found

...Wouldn't that be > > > > > > > a suspend ordering violation? > > > > > > > > > > > > No. We put the GPU into D3hot first, > > > > > > > > OK > > > > > > > > Does this involve any AML, like a _PS3 under the GPU object? > > > > > > I don't see _PS3 (nor _PS0) for that object. If I read it right the GPU > > > itself is not described in ACPI tables at all. > > > > OK > > > > > > > > then the root port and then turn > > &gt...

On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 06:13:51PM +0200, Peter Wu wrote: > Do you have any suggestions for the case where the pcieport driver > refuses to put the bridge in D3 (because the BIOS is too old)? In that > case the nouveau driver needs to fallback to the DSM method (but not > when runtime PM is deliberately disabled by writing control=on). Do you know what Windows does then? I think we

...are probably approaching an untested area. So far > firmware seems fine with using *only* DSM *or* PR3, but at least my > laptop gets confused when you use both at the same time. > > The latter happens on pci/pm (8b71f565) without other patches: > > 1. nouveau invokes _DSM and _PS3, device is put in D3cold. > 2. pcieport driver calls PG00._OFF (PG00 is returned by _PR3). > 3. Wake up Nvidia device (e.g. by power=on). > 4. This will trigger PG00._ON (via pcieport) and _PS0 (via nouveau). > 5. Nvidia card is not really ready (observed via "restoring config...

....8.4 (mainline fails to > boot due to a kbuild issue which I reported elsewhere), but the output > is empty. That seems to indicate that flags.power_resources is unset. Is it completely empty or is it empty just for RP05? It should print out all devices with power resources. > Given that _PS3 exists and is indeed a package with some elements, it > seems that acpi_extract_power_resources is failing. Note that in the > SSDT, the power resource NVP3 was referenced before it was defined, > could that result in this enumeration failure? Relevant SSDT excerpt: > > Scope (\...